The Dunwich Legacy

[Julia 2,810]

 

 

 

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

 

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

 

 

Exactly, testers are not allowed to share their position as testers until the game's released

[mulletcheese 695]

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

Exactly, testers are not allowed to share their position as testers until the game's released

It's safer just to assume Julia playtests everything that comes out of FFG.

I might be reading over it, but is The Dunwich Legacy Deluxe coming with a full playset of every card, or is this also a 'buy two if you want a complete set'?

Expansions for the LCGs come with complet playsets. It's just the core sets that don't to keep cost down and variety up.

I believe Great Devourer did not, but I may be wrong on that.

You are indeed wrong on that. There were single copies of the Tyranid Synapse creatures, but you can only include 1 in a deck anyway, so they were still full playsets.

There was a star wars deluxe expansion that didn't include a full playset. Edited September 12, 2016 by mulletcheese

[Shirys 150]

 

Please.... sto... op...

 

-My wallet

 

  The problem isn't your wallet.  The problem is your wallet is likely leather..  Have you considered going from leather to chainmail, or even half-plate?

 

 

I'd rather go full plate! More AC vs spending

 

Won't be too convenient through security checks in airports though...

[TomPow 2]

I'm confused by Jim Culver's ability. Treat the modifier on skull tokens you reveal as a "0." Anytime you reveal and elder sign token, you may choose to treat it as a skull token. Elder sign token effect: +1. I'm guessing Jim has some kind of Wendy Adams auto-includes that tie in with this.

,

[mjhan300 4]

If I am choosing to play with 3 or 4 players, I understand that I need to buy (2) core boxes so I can create up to (4) complete characters, but what about the expansions that follow? Will I always need to buy (2) if I want to build (4) investigators?

 

Love the theme...

 

 

[Vlad3theImpaler 514]

I'm confused by Jim Culver's ability. Treat the modifier on skull tokens you reveal as a "0." Anytime you reveal and elder sign token, you may choose to treat it as a skull token. Elder sign token effect: +1. I'm guessing Jim has some kind of Wendy Adams auto-includes that tie in with this.

,

That's what I'm assuming as well, because without anything else that triggers off the skull results, there's no reason you would want to treat an elder sign as a skull from what we've seen.

[Doma0997 72]

If I am choosing to play with 3 or 4 players, I understand that I need to buy (2) core boxes so I can create up to (4) complete characters, but what about the expansions that follow? Will I always need to buy (2) if I want to build (4) investigators?

 

Love the theme...

 

Well, here's the thing. Once you have the decks, that's it, you're good. Now if you want to improve on a couple, you only need one set. The only reason you need more than one of a set is if multiple people you are providing for (or multiple characters in this case) are going to share cards in the set past the maximum. Say there is a player card in dunwich that you really want in multiple decks. You'll only get two copies, which is enough for one deck, so if you want that card in multiple decks, you either give two decks one card, or you buy more of that expansion. 

[ktom 598]

That's what I'm assuming as well, because without anything else that triggers off the skull results, there's no reason you would want to treat an elder sign as a skull from what we've seen.

 

We can make some assumptions, though. In the "Clues, Challenges and Chaos" article, they show a scenario difficulty card, indicating what the various symbol tokens do for the scenario. They're not just about modifiers; they kick off other effects, too ("If you fail, take 1 horror" or "If there is a Ghoul enemy at your location, take 1 damage"). Since Jim Culver's ability only changes the modifier on the skull token to 0, I'd assume he leaves the "other effects" in place - and it's not too hard to imagine a situation in which I might want the "other effects" to happen because I could turn them to my advantage (e.g., maybe some sort of an, "After you take damage, gain resources" ability somewhere).

 

From what we've seen so far, it's hard to imagine wanting to turn an Elder Sign into a Skull very often, but it's also not hard to imagine that situations could arise where a Skull (with a 0 modifier) might actually be preferable to an Elder Sign (with just the +1 modifier).

 

Edit: But, I suppose that's what you might mean by "triggers off the skull results," which I originally took to simply mean "trigger off of pulling the skull."

Edited September 12, 2016 by ktom

[Apophenia 16]

One thought. What if there were cards that gave an advantage if you succeed by only a small margin. If a skull showed you could potentially lower your result and get those benefits. 

[rsdockery 540]

One thought. What if there were cards that gave an advantage if you succeed by only a small margin. If a skull showed you could potentially lower your result and get those benefits. 

 

We've already seen cards that give a bonus if you fail by a small margin (Look What I Found!).

[John Constantine 967]

 

 

 

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

 

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

That was more of a rhetorical question, she obviously does.

[Chronos96 15]

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

[TomPow 2]

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Do you mean the currently released game Elder Sign?

[Kakita Shiro 992]

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

To begin, Elder Sign is not a card game but a dice-based board game.

[Vlad3theImpaler 514]

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Pretty much everything beyond "they are games from Fantasy Flight based on the Cthulhu Mythos." They are completely different games. I recommend looking at the product pages for each to see what the gameplay is like.

[Chronos96 15]

 

Hi, I'm new here. Can someone explain what the difference will be between the Elder Signs Card game and the Arkham Horror Living Card Game?

Do you mean the currently released game Elder Sign?

 

Yes. What's the main difference? I understand the concept of Living Card Games now but I'm still not entirely clear on the difference between Elder Sign and the Arkham Horror LCG.

[Doma0997 72]

Elder Sign is a dice rolling game, and the lightest game the Arkham Horror line has to offer. The LCG will be a card game driven by a light narrative.

 

That's the easiest way I can put it.

[ktom 598]

Control and planning based on building your deck rather than rolling the dice?

The LCG, though the campaign mode, seems to have more of an ongoing story focus?

 

At some point, it's kind of like trying to describe the difference between Yahtzee and Gin Rummy.

[dboeren1 294]

They are SO different that it's difficult to compare them at all.  It's like comparing Baseball and Pac-man.  They both have... um... round things in them and there's some running and chasing involved?  Both feature a protagonist against a team of defenders, sort of?

[alexbobspoons 551]

Best thing to compare is to watch the Arkham Horror LCG Gencon2016 vids on youtube, then on youtube watch the tabletop (with Wil Wheaton and the lovely Felicia Day) playthrough of Elder Sign.

You will see how components and gameplay both completely differ

[Toqtamish 3,643]

I think using any number of cards lvl 0-2 from a sub class is a better deal than up to 5 lvl 0 from any other class.

 

Not necessarily. If you solo the game with just one investigator, you may want this or that card from another class to get some more variety vs great specialization. Or you may want to get an extra lvl 0 card for you deck because while campaigning you discover you need to boost this or that attribute and you need that card

You are playtesting this one too, aren't you?

Playtesters cannot reveal that information before products release.

That was more of a rhetorical question, she obviously does.

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

[dboeren1 294]

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

 

Same here, I've playtested for three LCGs but I'm certainly not on everything.

[John Constantine 967]

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

I did not knew she tests a lot, I only knew she tested MoM2.0. And my assumption is not based on how much games she tested for FFG in the past, but rather on how much insight into that unreleased game she has. By the way, if a person is not a tester, there is no NDA that forbids him from replying "no" to the question "r u a tester?", so "I can't answer that because NDA" is basically a "yes".

Edited September 14, 2016 by John Constantine

[Julia 2,810]

 

Just because she tests a lot of their games doesn't mean she tests them all. I've tested for three of their LCGs so far. And for IA. Plus my answer is for others who may not know that playtesters cannot reveal their status as per the NDA we all sign with FFG.

I did not knew she tests a lot, I only knew she tested MoM2.0. And my assumption is not based on how much games she tested for FFG in the past, but rather on how much insight into that unreleased game she has. By the way, if a person is not a tester, there is no NDA that forbids him from replying "no" to the question "r u a tester?", so "I can't answer that because NDA" is basically a "yes".

 

 

This is not correct, I always say "I cannot answer to this" because it's the most politically correct answer to me. My NDA requires me not to share any information of sort; saying "I wasn't a tester for this" is giving information in the same way as saying "I was a tester for this" and they are both wrong. So, for all games, even those I clearly don't test, my answer will always be "testers cannot disclose their eventual position as testers before release". Period.

 

In any case, I hardly think I have insight on this particular product, considering that I asked about frequency of cards and stuff. Had I been a tester, I'd have known, and not asked. What I post are thoughts and impressions, derived from articles and from general knowledge of games.

 

Now please can we move on? This has nothing to do with the Dunwich Legacy, it's barely of interest for anyone, and it's frankly getting annoying for me. The only result you'll all achieve here is that I kill my profile and stop commenting on games. I'm here because I believe in helping the community grow, in the same way the community helped me back in 2007 when I started playing Arkham Horror.

 

Back on topic, please

[wirbowsky 82]

 

Back on topic, please

 

 

This